Obama Campaign In Disarray? Making Political Hay Out of Bhutto Assassination?

It’s hard to believe that Barack Obama’s campaign could be in such disarray that its campaign manager, David Axelrod, would use the tragic, horrific assassination of Benazir Bhutto to take, as CNN’s anchor just said, a “swipe” at Sen. Clinton. Writes Taylor Marsh, “The Obama campaign is in a panic. Mr. Axelrod’s reprehensible statement is meant to deflect the spotlight and rescue his candidate, because as people think about the implications of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination one thing comes to mind and it isn’t the leadership experience of Barack Obama.”

Taylor quotes The Page, which reports, “David Axelrod, Barack Obama’s top strategist, told reporters after the speech that Clinton will not benefit from a renewed conversation about foreign policy in the wake of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination in Pakistan.” Clinton will not benefit? Is Axelrod so desperate he’d make a swipe like that right after Bhutto’s assassination?

Benazir Bhutto … was the only celebrity whom Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton says she stood in a rope line to see. Later, after Mrs. Clinton came to international prominence, Ms. Bhutto would hold a luncheon for her and share an amusing observation about the status of husbands married to women politicians.

In 1989, Mrs. Clinton and her daughter, Chelsea, were in London and noticed a commotion outside the Ritz Hotel, according to Mrs. Clinton’s memoir, “Living History.” They discovered people waiting to see Ms. Bhutto, then the head of her father’s political party. So they joined the crowd and watched her, swathed in yellow chiffon, sweep into the lobby.

A few years later, after Mrs. Clinton had become first lady and Ms. Bhutto had become prime minister, Ms. Bhutto held a luncheon in Pakistan in Mrs. Clinton’s honor. The guests included several other high-powered women.

Mrs. Clinton, who described Ms. Bhutto as “brilliant and striking,” said the prime minister led a discussion about the changing roles of women in Pakistan and told a joke about her husband’s status as first spouse.

“According to newspapers in Pakistan,” Ms. Bhutto said, “Mr. Asif Zardari is de facto prime minister of the country. My husband tells me, ‘Only the first lady can appreciate it’s not true.’” […]

“Bhutto acknowledged the difficulties faced by women who were breaking with tradition and taking leading roles in public life,” she wrote. “She deftly managed to refer both to the challenges I had encountered during my White House tenure and to her own situation. ‘Women who take on tough issues and stake out new territory are often on the receiving end of ignorance,’ she concluded.”

The New York Times blog sets the tone that should be carried out by all news organizations as well as all candidates at this time, so soon after Ms. Bhutto’s tragic assassination. To use this tragedy as political fodder makes one think that campaign must be panicking.

International tragedy has made Barack Obama and his campaign desperate for fear their paper thin experience in foreign policy will be weighed as voters ready for the Iowa primaries. It’s in moments of crisis you find out what a candidate has and the strength of his character to respond to real dangers in the world. Another example of Mr. Obama’s campaign of “hope,” no doubt.

But Mr. Axelrod has stepped into it now. Blaming Clinton? This statement is not only beyond the pale, but it is made even more reprehensible, not to mention ridiculous, by Obama’s campaign turning from the very serious subjects of Afghanistan-Pakistan-al Qaeda to the pop culture filmmaker Woody Allen, equating the two in a statement that is so ignorant you have to wonder if the Obama camp actually understands the possible ramifications of what happened today. I assure you, it does not come close to resembling or reflecting Woody Allen’s wisdom on life. Seriously, the celebrity candidacy of Barack Obama, now threatened by a foreign policy emergency, has slipped into the nonsensical.

It reminds me of what Mr. Obama said himself about Pakistan in September, which now looks equally ignorant. … READ ALL of Taylor Marsh’s remarkable new post.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n24/ali_01_.html
Bhutto history from someone who actually knows something about Pakistan and the Bhuttos.
Basically another bush&co kleptocrat gone.
Negroponte FTW
There was an assassination attempt on Sharif today also but that appears to have missed official notice here.
I wonder if the Pakistanis might feel about the oh so serious senator Dodd telling them to hold off elections the same way New Yorkers felt about Guiliani trying to abort the election after 9/11?
Maybe it isn’t all about the USA or how this plays in Iowa or what a bunch of uneducated demsopublicans say. Maybe this is just hardball politics Pakistani style. Ask the surviving Kennedy about hardball politics, or Malcolm’s kids or MLK’s.

I noticed that wiki left out that the drug running Dostrum gang hanged Najibullah. I wonder why.

Cee

CK,

The Bhutto family plays hardball. The daughter ousted her mother to head that party. There were also deaths of family members that were also blamed on Benezir. Wild stuff.

I was glad to see a CNN poll this morning that indicated that 72% of us said getting involved in Pakistan is NOT OUR BUSINESS. Nukes or no nukes.

CK

Yes indeed. The Bhutto clan is a lot like the Bush clan and the Bin Laden clan. However the Bhutto clan is about done now. A few teenage sons of no importance for at least a decade.
72% eh, everyone of them believing the same thing Dr. Paul said yesterday when he was interrogated by AipacBlitzer. Wolfie was so depressed.
If things get way out of hand in Pakistan, Hu and Wen will handle it.
Oh just a side note, the US decided to again not back up Taiwan’s demand for UN admission. Ripe fruit falleth into the hands of the righteous. ( I think that is in one of the holy books somewhere)

Shirin

How nice! How lovely! Hillary and her daughter got all dressed up in fancy Pakistani costumes once.

And that photo is relevant to Obama’s (and every other bloody candidates’) making political hay out of the Bhutto assassination exactly how?

Nathan

It’s just a photo. Relax.

Shirin

Sure, it’s just a photo. And what is it doing in a story about Obama’s campaign.

Oh, wait – nevermind, I know.

Nathan

First, those are not Pakistani “costumes.” Have some respect for different cultures. Second, how is a photo worthy of your outrage and yet you fail to muster any anger over Obama’s campaign sucker punching Hillary the way it did? Wow. (Besides, if there was a similar photo of Obama in Pakistani clothing, you’d be shrieking that it was an all an effort to demonize him as a Muslim)

How’s this for relevancy: Obama vowed to move US troops from Iraq to Pakistan and threatened to violate its sovereignty if Musharraf failed to act against terrorists. He said this just this August while it was public knowledge that the country was spinning out of control. Nothing like publicly boasting about attacking a nuclear powder keg to stabilize the region, huh? Where’s your outrage over that?!

I am not even a Hillary supporter–at all!–but I am astounded at how hysterical Obama supporters are. Truly disgusting.

Shirin

Nathan, if you want to berate someone, it is generally a good idea to berate them for positions they actually hold, or things they have actually said. When you do otherwise, you end up looking kind of silly.

1. It should be obvious that I am anything but an Obama supporter.

2. I am also anything but a supporter of Hillary Clinton.

3. Politicians’ pissing and monkey-poop-throwing contest tactics are not worth the energy it takes to be outraged.

4. When an American politician gets dressed up as a rich Pakistani lady for a photo op she is wearing a costume. And dressing up like a rich Pakistani lady for a photo op doesn’t qualify her as an expert on Pakistan.

5. If someone prominently featured a photo of Barak Obama dressed up as a rich Pakistani man as part of a blog entry berating Hillary Clinton I would have the same reaction I did to the photo of Hillary.

Shirin

Oh yes – and please try not to mistake annoyance for outrage.

Shirin

“Have some respect for different cultures.”

Now THAT’s rich! LOOOOOOOOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Retired

Actually, my first impression of he photo was that, since they were all bowing their heads, they were all praying in the Christian fashion. Perhaps Hillary and Chelsea had secretly converted Benazir to Christianity, sort of an offset to Obama being a secret Muslim. Then I realized that that would’ve been Huckabee’s job. Oh, well!

http://1950democrat.livejournal.com 1950democrat

Some one was questioning whether Obama had threatened to send US troops into Pakistan. He certainly did, according to his own website:

The more I here from Clinton supporters, the more I feel inspired to go out and work to elect Barack Obama. You people are shameless. Y’all are the old, cynical dinosaurs of the left. What an unmitigated tragedy it would be if y’all became the face of the new Democratic age – an age that is coming about despite you, not because of you.

TeakWoodKite

I don’t think the age of Aquarius is upon us any time soon. For the rest,I am just trying to survive the Raptors of the world that hide among us. If that motivates you, its no-fault politics.

Who cares? It’s all a bunch of monkeys sitting around slinging monkey poop at each other. Nero made music while Rome burned, these guys hurl turds at each other. Brilliant!

Titus Pullo

“Well, I’d consider that criticism if Halperin had been opining, but he was merely reporting what Axelrod said to a gaggle of reporters. How can you be critical of the source since that is indeed what Axelrod said? It is a factual report. There is video too.”

Susan, having seen the video it now appears that Halperin did accurately copy and paste. As to how I can be critical…anyone who’s read the WaPo recently would know what I’m talking about. Remember the front page hit job on Edwards regarding a house he had purchased? Factually correct it was, but the tone of the article led one to believe there was something somehow inappropriate about it, even though it was completely on the up-and-up. Same thing with the WaPo article re-circulating the rumors about Obama’s supposed Madrassa schooling, which never once mentioned the fact that the rumors had been de-bunked. Mark Halperin is not an honest broker of information, I would advise against using him to make points…then again, there aren’t a lot of honest brokers of information out there.

Nathan

Obama had earlier threatened to violate the sovereignty of Pakistan if he Musharraf failed to remove terrorist strongholds. How do his supporters react? By completely ignoring that statement and saying that Bhutto’s assassination proves his judgment was right all along. Let’s pretend Obama didn’t threaten to attack Pakistan. What is so amazingly brilliant about noting the obvious, that Pakistan was a haven for extremists?

Cee

Let’s pretend Obama didn’t threaten to attack Pakistan. What is so amazingly brilliant about noting the obvious, that Pakistan was a haven for extremists?

I was just reading about that. He said if Pakistan didn’t act, the US would. Bhutto agreed with him.

I don’t.

Cee

Showing Hillary with the kleptocrat Bhutto isn’t inspiring. Who thought that was a good idea to bring that photo out?
Damn near like the photo of Hussein and Rumsfeld, IMHO.
Here’s why:

The Bhutto government sang a nice song when it came to women’s issues in Pakistan. Her speeches voicing concern for women’s social, health and discrimination issues were widely noted. Benazir Bhutto announced plans to elevate and entrench womens’ rights into the Pakistani society, but despite the well publicized promises, Bhutto did not propose or introduce any legislation to improve welfare services for women. She promised to repeal laws (such as Hudood and Zina ordinances) that curtail the rights of women in Pakistan, but even those blatantly discriminatory laws were never addressed or challenged by her government. Despite her majority in Parliament, she blamed the opposition.

TeakWoodKite

Interesting Photo. I wonder wonder what Chelsea is thinking now and then.
For Pakistan to be yanked into the breach more than it is already makes the whole equation of balancing US national security interest and regional agendas more compressed and that much closer to “critical mass”. If you consider Mushariff cuts deals with elements in the “tribal lands” and jails “moderate” elements, combined with the fickle relations with the Pakistani intelligence the U.S. has…we got (barney rubble) trouble and one more year of Bush to screw this up more than it is. (I am not the smartest clam at low tide but I know this not a good way to start a new year.)

Titus Pullo

Oh, and linking to right-wing hacks like Mark Halperin doesn’t do much to make your case either.

http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

Well, I’d consider that criticism if Halperin had been opining, but he was merely reporting what Axelrod said to a gaggle of reporters. How can you be critical of the source since that is indeed what Axelrod said? It is a factual report. There is video too.

Titus Pullo

Does the extra term Hillary has served in the Senate, combined w/ being first lady really qualify as a substantially greater level of foreign policy experience? Even when we factor in her errors in judgment regarding Iraq and Kyl/Lieberman? I’m not seeing it at all. Try again.

Taters

Many of the 23 senators that voted nay authorizing force against Iraq voted for KL. including both of mine, Levin and Stabenow. The non binding amendment was name calling more than anything else, and certainly a “feel good” vote for Republicans and more of a stalling tactic for the Dems. Any authorization of force was stripped.http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/kyl-lieberman-amendment/?resultpage=1&amp;

I supported Jim Webb’s candidacy and I agree with him on most things but I disagreed with his original take on this.
Again, this non binding amendment had no authorization to use force.
Wes Clark who started StopIranWar and has been adamantly opposed to attacking Iran, thinks it was the right vote for Hillary.

In fact, Obama’s Senate voting record on Iraq is nearly identical to Clinton’s. Over the two years Obama has been in the Senate, the only Iraq-related vote on which they differed was the confirmation earlier this year of General George Casey to be Chief of Staff of the Army, which Obama voted for and Clinton voted against. Just last week, in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Obama conceded that his position on the war is not the “polar opposite” of Clinton’s.

“Wes Clark who started StopIranWar and has been adamantly opposed to attacking Iran, thinks it was the right vote for Hillary.”

Wes Clark is not right about everything (nor is Larry, by the way).

“Designating the IRG as terrorists bellicose perhaps, but it is not war.
It’s diplomacy.”

Oh, puleeeeeeeeze! Give me a break. If that is diplomacy, then so is telling your neighbor that his wife is a fat, ugly whore, and his kids are drug dealers.

Taters

Is war not the bluntest tool of diplomacy?

Shirin

Didn’t someone say that war is diplomacy by other means?

Well, if war = diplomacy, then Hillary never met a diplomacy she didn’t love.

bob h

If Musharaff was stonewalling Bhutto’s requests for enhanced security, why did the White House not insist that it be provided, given how much Mushi enjoys our $billions? Is this another George-Condi fuckup?

http://www.theliberaloc.com Andrew Davey

Joe-

There’s a HUGE difference, and you know it. First off, bayh is NOT on Hillary’s campaign payroll. he spoke for himself there. And secondly, he never said anything about Obama causing the death of Bhutto. So really, you’re making a HUGE stretch trying to compare Bayh’s admittedly clumsy statement with Axelrod accusing Hillary of being some “accessory to murder”.

http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

And Axelrod is not only Obama’s campaign manager, he’s his closest confidante….

Fred C. Dobbs

Axelrod is also the SECOND stupidest SOB in the Obama campaign, Prima Facie evidence thereof being Obama’s failure to relieve him of any duties which would put him in close proximity to a TV camera, microphone, telephone, FAX machine or semaphore.

Obama needs a handler like the Addled Puppet Reagan had in the late Lyn Nofziger (“Lyn!!! He’s TALKING again!!!!!”)

Charlie McCarthy and Danny O’Day knew who had their hands up their asses (Edgar Bergen and Jimmy Nelson, in case you’re too young to remember) and their roles were ascribed and delineated.

It would appear that the Obama campaign can’t afford a full-time Loose Cannon, so they take turns at the task.

What Tommy Franks said about Feith goes for Axelrod, too.

Joe

I guess that the writer of this article forgot the comments made by Hillary mouth piece Evan Bayh today:

“I think they know we live in a dangerous world, and tragedies like this just remind us that we need someone with the seasoning, the experience and the strength to be commander in chief during uncertain times,” he said. “The job of the next president is not to be entertainer in chief. The job of the next president is to move our country forward to make the substantive changes that will matter in our daily lives, and to protect us in an uncertain and dangerous world. And that’s why in a field of very good candidates, I believe Senator Clinton has the right combination of experience and strength to accomplish all of those things.”

Taylor Marsh is right! From the so-called ‘campaign of hope’ comes the most disgusting campaign stunt I’ve ever seen. Does Axelrod feel anything over this woman’s death? Nothing is real to David Axelrod and nothing is real in the Obama campaign.

lester

Psbro

Now Lester, you know you are not allowd to post without taking your medicine.
Silly Wabbitt

DCDemocrat

The situation is a terrible tragedy. The horrific loss that this assassination represents should be the only focus of the story. I don’t understand why David Axelrod has sought to make political capital out of a horrific loss for Pakistan, the U.S., and the world.

Shirin

Buy ALL the candidates have latched onto this thing as a source of political capital.

Shirin

but, not buy.

http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

Thanks for adding that … I meant to put it in / was in a rush because I’ve got physical therapy. It is a doozy.

Even CNN’s anchor was shocked, it was easy to see.

Gee, I wonder what Chris Matthews will say? How he’ll spin that to make Obama look good? Chris Matthews is “rapturous” — even Wonkette is making fun of him and his wild statements. Oh, and Matthews said — in one of his flights of rhetoric, that he doesn’t know where Rangoon is. Wow.

Shirin

Good point, Leslie. And I would add that we really don’t know how Obama would have voted on that critical vote in 2002, do we, because he was not, after all, a Senator at that time. What we DO know is that his votes – the ones he has not ducked out on, that is – are just about perfectly in line with Hillary’s. So, whatever she is responsible for in that regard, he is also responsible for.

This website and the articles posted therein are contributed by authors who have no affiliation to the website or the website’s owner/moderator. All content provided on this blog is for informational purposes only and has been contributed by the owners for no monetary compensation. The owner/moderator makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by accessing any website link(s) provided in a post. As such, the owner/moderator will not be liable for any errors or omissions contained in the information set forth in an authored post nor for the availability of said information. The owner/moderator will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages arising from any information set forth in any author’s post(s) and will not indemnify the authors for any purpose arising from or related to the author’s post. By posting an article on this blog, the author, and the author alone, expressly assumes any liability related to the post. The owner/moderator does not share personal information with third-parties nor does the owner store information collected about your visit for use other than to analyze content performance. The owner/moderator is not responsible for the republishing of the content contained on this blog on other websites or media without permission. The owner/moderator of the blog reserves the right to edit or delete any comments submitted to this blog without notice due to (a) comments deemed to be spam or questionable spam; (b) comments including profanity; (c) comments containing language or concepts that could be deemed offensive; or (d) comments that attack a person or their character. The decision to remove any comments that violate the terms and conditions herein are made at the sole discretion of the owner/moderator. The policies, terms and conditions herein are subject to change at any time and without prior notice.

We defray costs with sales and donations. Do you shop at Amazon? Click any ad here, make any purchase, and we get a percentage. Thanks!

ABOUT US

Tired of spin? Larry Johnson offers no quarter on issues of your security.